Hi Owen,
I do not support what you propose either. I don't disagree with your
past assertions that "leasing" may be an appropriate term to describe
the normal practice of LIRs delegating addresses in association with
connectivity services. Given the fact that we're all using the term
leasing to refer to slightly different things, let me clarify my earlier
statements. First, let me give an unambiguous definition from a recent
ACM paper:
A leasing contract can restrict address usage andmay include hosting
or network connectivity agreements, or both.For hosters, the leased
address space is usually still located in theirown AS. In this paper
we are considering two types of IP leasingmodels. In the first model
an IP broker only leases IP address spaceto a customer, while in the
second the IP leasing is bundled withanother service contract, e.g.,
infrastructure hosting.
I would support a well crafted policy proposal to disallow transactions
of the type they refer to as the "first model", i.e. leasing addresses
without any associated connectivity agreement, so long as it achieves
that goal without affecting the practices described in the second model.
I don't see surcharging or separate line items for address space in
association with connectivity services as an issue, or consider it to be
the same thing as leasing space off-network, which is an unrelated
business practice. In the absence of a policy proposal that can tackle
the former model without affecting the normal operation of LIRs, I
prefer to keep the current policy, which allows the practice of
off-network leasing, but does not allow leased addresses to be used as
justification for additional space.
Thanks,
Isaiah
This may be considered out of scope for policy and/or might require a
combination of policy and amendment to the RSA, but here goes:
Template: ARIN-POLICY-PROPOSAL-TEMPLATE-3.0
1. Policy Proposal Name: Ban IP Number Resource Leasing in the
ARIN Region
2. Proposal Originator
a. name: Owen DeLong
b. email:owen at delong.com
<https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml>
c. telephone: 408-890-7992
d. organization: DeLong Consulting
3. Date: 22 September, 2021
4. Problem Statement:
There is substantial discussion on PPML in opposition to Mike
Burn’s proposal to allow leasing. This proposal is offered as an antonym for
the consideration of those opposed to Mike’s proposal.
This proposal would, effectively prevent all LIRs from engaging
in leasing transactions or (sur)charging on the basis of the number of IP
number resources issued.
5. Policy statement:
Add to the appropriate places in each
of sections 4, 5, and 6 a new section containing the following text:
No signatory to any ARIN RSA is permitted by policy to engage in a recurring
charge for addresses or a differentiated service charge based on the number if
addresses issued to a customer. Addresses must be provided strictly as part of
a contract for connectivity services and the number of addresses provided shall
not, in any way, affect the cost of those connectivity services.
6. Comments:
a. Timetable for implementation: Immediate
b. Anything else
END OF TEMPLATE
_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
